Ramalingam, S and Mahalingam, A (2018) Knowledge coordination in transnational engineering projects: A practice-based study. Construction Management and Economics, 36(12), pp. 700-715. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Several multinational engineering firms offshore the delivery of engineering design or structural detail drawings to their globally distributed delivery centres. Studies have reported knowledge-sharing challenges when such work is co-ordinated across boundaries. This study takes a practice-based approach to explore knowledge-coordinating challenges across two multinational engineering firms that offshore projects to their global delivery centres in India. Data was collected from six infrastructure projects in the two delivery centres through direct observations augmented with real-time interviews and reviews of e-mails and project documents. This data was analysed qualitatively using ethnographic-coding techniques. Empirical findings identified a set of eight coordinating practices, many of which were emergent, which the teams creatively recombined and enacted as co-ordinating mechanisms that spanned organisational boundaries. Seven practices served to transfer knowledge and one practice transformed knowledge across onshore and offshore units. The study contributes to our understanding of co-ordinating by identifying emergent and informal coordinating practices in offshored construction projects and provides insights to practitioners on the boundary spanning capabilities of these practices.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | coordinating practices; global virtual teams; knowledge boundaries; practice approach; transnational projects |
| Index terms: | interview, boundary spanning, boundaries, construction project, practitioner, e-mail, drawing, coordination, India, engineering firm, infrastructure project, direct observation, virtual team, documents, engineering design |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, production management, Geography, technical documentation, communication, practitioner, management, information systems, professional development, design process, property law, firms, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Research Practice, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Information Management, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here